Revolving door spins again in N.C.

Published: Tuesday, September 9, 2003 at 4:30 a.m.

Last Modified: Tuesday, September 9, 2003 at 12:00 a.m.

From the moment he came from nowhere to upset Lauch Faircloth and win a U.S. Senate seat, John Edwards had displayed impressive ambition.

He put an exclamation point on that chutzpah Sunday with his announcement that he would abandon the Senate seat he won in 1998 and concentrate on his campaign for president.

Giving up the Senate after four years is more like it, considering that Edwards has been running full-time for the presidency (and skipping Senate votes) for a year. Now he will run full-time without having to look over his shoulder at Richard Burr, the Winston-Salem congressman whom White House political strategist Karl Rove has anointed the Republican nominee.

Near-term, Edwards' decision is good for Burr, good for probable Democratic Senate candidates Erskine Bowles and Dan Blue and bad for constituents who will get half the number of active, engaged and voting senators they bargained for.

Long-term it presents more trouble for Democrats in the South, posing the possibility of losing a fourth Democratic Senate seat next year (along with those in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida).

Democrats win a statewide election in North Carolina only when they hold the Eastern North Carolina Jessecrats, as four-term governor Jim Hunt did.

A recent poll in the News & Observer of Raleigh showed Edwards leading Burr 47 to 39. But that was before the GOP has had a chance to paint the 50-year-old incumbent as a callow left-wing liberal.

To win over rank-and-file Democrats who decide the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, Edwards had to stake out positions that cast him well to the left of the decisive middle back home. Although he has refused to pander to the anti-war vote, he has taken positions on gay marriage and other social issues that would have given Rove and Burr a powerful load of ammunition for the 2004 campaign.

Republicans who track North Carolina politics will be heartened by history: No one has been re-elected to this Senate seat since 1968 and it has switched back and forth from one party to the other every cycle since 1974.

Democratic leaders had exerted heavy pressure on Edwards to decide, in or out, so that the Democrats could begin their own campaigns in earnest or back off.

A Republican candidate standing with Bush could be vulnerable on issues like textile job losses and clean air. The challenge for the Democrat will be in the areas of national defense, stabilizing Social Security and Medicare and doing something about the runaway national debt.

Edwards has looked from the start to be a more likely choice for vice president, and his decision to focus on the White House bid exclusively would seem to bolster that prospect. A nomination of either John Kerry or Howard Dean will cry for the need for geographic balance and an attempt to stop Bush from a Southern sweep.

But if things do not break surprisingly well for the Democrats in 2004, Edwards becomes a short-lived if bright burning footnote in the state's history.

<p>From the moment he came from nowhere to upset Lauch Faircloth and win a U.S. Senate seat, John Edwards had displayed impressive ambition.</p><!-- Nothing to do. The paragraph has already been output --><p>He put an exclamation point on that chutzpah Sunday with his announcement that he would abandon the Senate seat he won in 1998 and concentrate on his campaign for president.</p><p>Giving up the Senate after four years is more like it, considering that Edwards has been running full-time for the presidency (and skipping Senate votes) for a year. Now he will run full-time without having to look over his shoulder at Richard Burr, the Winston-Salem congressman whom White House political strategist Karl Rove has anointed the Republican nominee.</p><p>Near-term, Edwards' decision is good for Burr, good for probable Democratic Senate candidates Erskine Bowles and Dan Blue and bad for constituents who will get half the number of active, engaged and voting senators they bargained for.</p><p>Long-term it presents more trouble for Democrats in the South, posing the possibility of losing a fourth Democratic Senate seat next year (along with those in South Carolina, Georgia and Florida).</p><p>Democrats win a statewide election in North Carolina only when they hold the Eastern North Carolina Jessecrats, as four-term governor Jim Hunt did.</p><p>A recent poll in the News & Observer of Raleigh showed Edwards leading Burr 47 to 39. But that was before the GOP has had a chance to paint the 50-year-old incumbent as a callow left-wing liberal.</p><p>To win over rank-and-file Democrats who decide the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary, Edwards had to stake out positions that cast him well to the left of the decisive middle back home. Although he has refused to pander to the anti-war vote, he has taken positions on gay marriage and other social issues that would have given Rove and Burr a powerful load of ammunition for the 2004 campaign.</p><p>Republicans who track North Carolina politics will be heartened by history: No one has been re-elected to this Senate seat since 1968 and it has switched back and forth from one party to the other every cycle since 1974.</p><p>Democratic leaders had exerted heavy pressure on Edwards to decide, in or out, so that the Democrats could begin their own campaigns in earnest or back off.</p><p>A Republican candidate standing with Bush could be vulnerable on issues like textile job losses and clean air. The challenge for the Democrat will be in the areas of national defense, stabilizing Social Security and Medicare and doing something about the runaway national debt.</p><p>Edwards has looked from the start to be a more likely choice for vice president, and his decision to focus on the White House bid exclusively would seem to bolster that prospect. A nomination of either John Kerry or Howard Dean will cry for the need for geographic balance and an attempt to stop Bush from a Southern sweep.</p><p>But if things do not break surprisingly well for the Democrats in 2004, Edwards becomes a short-lived if bright burning footnote in the state's history.</p>